Jump to content
12Alfa

First Clash

What time will be best for you to attend 1st Clash?  

24 members have voted

  1. 1. What time will be best for you to attend 1st Clash?



Recommended Posts

simoncollar.jpg

'87 or '88.

I'm pretty sure bell bottoms were the 70's man... Though i did have the big hair and the spliffs!!.

Sorry, Dark. But this changes everything, I don't think I can ever take you seriously anymore. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok the AAR points.

Please state with the following, points to sustain (max 3):men_ani:, points to improve ( with suggestions):c:

Thanks for the support.:luxhello:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sustains (Good Points):

1. Multi national MP is always good.

2. Thanks for doing the hard yards to get it up and running - keep up the good work.

3. Good Blue plan

Improve / Fix:

1. Improve: Multi parties, all meant to be on one side, resulted in bad co-ord (unable to call artillery, unable to see spotted units on map, etc.)

1. Suggested Fix: Put all of Blue on "Blue" and all of Red on "Red" so we can call artillery and I can see targets seen by the other sub units.

2. Improve: Getting up at 0500 for a 0600 start and then one hour of briefing for what 20 mins of game play?

2. Suggested Fix: Agree to some minimum period of game play before one side or other can "call it", say 60 mins?

3. Improve: Whilst I didn't fire, I suspect lag would have made TOW engagements problematic.

3. Suggested Fix: Give guided weapons to people closer to the server. Happy to "chop" them as required.

Sorry going over the "3" limit ...

4. Improve: Lack of "load plan" option working meant Brun had to redraw the plan after we went back for late arrivals.

4. Suggested Fix: Press on and start the mission, then use the "pause and re-join" feature for late comers to catch up (as if they'd dropped). That way we don't lose the graphics and it isn't that much longer (by the time you restart and re draw the plan from scratch). Having three sides instead of 6 or so (see Improve 1 above) will shorten this process too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sustains (Good Points):

1. Multi national MP is always good.

2. Thanks for doing the hard yards to get it up and running - keep up the good work.

3. Good Blue plan

Improve / Fix:

1. Improve: Multi parties, all meant to be on one side, resulted in bad co-ord (unable to call artillery, unable to see spotted units on map, etc.)

1. Suggested Fix: Put all of Blue on "Blue" and all of Red on "Red" so we can call artillery and I can see targets seen by the other sub units.

2. Improve: Getting up at 0500 for a 0600 start and then one hour of briefing for what 20 mins of game play?

2. Suggested Fix: Agree to some minimum period of game play before one side or other can "call it", say 60 mins?

3. Improve: Whilst I didn't fire, I suspect lag would have made TOW engagements problematic.

3. Suggested Fix: Give guided weapons to people closer to the server. Happy to "chop" them as required.

Sorry going over the "3" limit ...

4. Improve: Lack of "load plan" option working meant Brun had to redraw the plan after we went back for late arrivals.

4. Suggested Fix: Press on and start the mission, then use the "pause and re-join" feature for late comers to catch up (as if they'd dropped). That way we don't lose the graphics and it isn't that much longer (by the time you restart and re draw the plan from scratch). Having three sides instead of 6 or so (see Improve 1 above) will shorten this process too.

Most if not all have been disused by both CO's or their reps and SOP are in the works that strangely are very close to your suggestions. I will post them here with in the week for all to read, and the CO's have given their blessings to the changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, first tanks to all that showed,its was a test mission, and we all have thoughts on how to improve this. I will be making changes as I have said prior to starting this.

On a whole it played out much like I thought, that being said the future mission will be different in scope and intensity.:cool3:

I have recorded the issues and will fix them for the next missions.:c:

So again, tanks for showing, great turnout.

:luxhello:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for setting this 12 ALPHA, I know that's a lot of work involved.

Wanted to post some suggestions...Mark was faster ;-)

As for arty: Yes, they should be on the blue side! And there should be one dedicated player acting as the "Fire-support-coordination cell". Only he should call the actuall fire missions, everyone else should just give him grids+targets.

br

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though the first mission had a few teething problems, it was still good. Thanks to all who zipped up the scenario or helped out with the organising, looking forward to the rest of the missions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to all those that joined the Canadians. Everyone went where I wanted in a timely manner and reacted to the enemy well. Nothing needs to be suggested to 12Apha that has not already been said.

People from all over the world took time out of their lives to participate (some at ungodly hours). As well as much time and effort by 12Alpha, and Myself into planning and preparation. Hopefully we can make it worth peoples time and play more than 20 min in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Killjoy
People from all over the world took time out of their lives to participate (some at ungodly hours). As well as much time and effort by 12Alpha, and Myself into planning and preparation. Hopefully we can make it worth peoples time and play more than 20 min in the future.

Taking the disposition of each side into account, it was going to be a 20 minute game anyway.

You couldn't possibly expect us to put up more of a fight when being faced down by a nearly a company of tanks, all we have is 20 BTRs and the largest thing we have to fire is an AT4?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Brun, reverse the sides and see what happens then :)

We had something along the lines of 25% losses of actual front line units with nothing to show for it. Some 20 BTRs attacking 9 tanks and 2 plts of 113s. Those losses were 30 minutes in.

AFAIK the purpose of the mission was to

1. Attempt to get through the objective (we tried and were unable to manage it with anything that survived)

2. Discover your defenses (which I could say we did).

The mission wasn't to waste defensive combat power attacking against tanks and APCs that are defending. With the artillery as it was we had no offensive combat power at all. I expected that it would last 30 minutes, I said it today and I said it last night. The difference was I expected for us to lose much more of the force involved than we did. As the guy who had the CO duties dropped in his lap 30 minutes before the IP was released I apologize that it was so short as it was, but such were the cards that we had and that was the mission we were tasked with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You couldn't possibly expect us to put up more of a fight when being faced down by a nearly a company of tanks, all we have is 20 BTRs and the largest thing we have to fire is an AT4?

Well to be honest apart from some vague information about the Enemy coming "from the East" and pursuing US Forces we didn't get much of an insight as to what the first echelon was going to be.

Having said that IIRC the first engagement in the book was along similar lines and if it follows the book's path, subsequent missions will be harder for NATO.

I was surprised to see technicals (had assumed WP would use "doctrinal" MR units - BRDM, BTR80, etc.) but I gather they were a proxy for something else.

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to 12Alpha, and everyone else for getting this up and running. I always enjoy the sense of community and teamwork in these events, so I think the more the better to build on a already great community.

Can't wait till the next one I am available for.

Tac out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well to be honest apart from some vague information about the Enemy coming "from the East" and pursuing US Forces we didn't get much of an insight as to what the first echelon was going to be.

Having said that IIRC the first engagement in the book was along similar lines and if it follows the book's path, subsequent missions will be harder for NATO.

I was surprised to see technicals (had assumed WP would use MR units - BRDM, BTR80, etc.) but I gather they were a proxy for something else.

On our side we were in pursuit of said Americans with the expectation of being able to plant ourselves in defensive positions near our objectives. We did not expect you guys to be far up the road network. :o. That was a surprise. I do not know what the technicals stood in for but many on our side commented on the poor camo of those vehicles. Bright red. :)

Great turnout. Looking forward to next installment. Nice job 12Alfa! :luxhello:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks to 12Alpha, and everyone else for getting this up and running. I always enjoy the sense of community and teamwork in these events, so I think the more the better to build on a already great community.

Can't wait till the next one I am available for.

Tac out

Amen. Appreciate the effort involved in all this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would love to see an AAR for this (family issues prevent involvemnt); and can I also ask - what map are you using and can it be downloaded please?

Have recently read First Clash. Great book, would love to see the SB map of that area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll dig it out and post here in a few minutes - but as you may have gathered from above it doesn't go for long. :)

There you are:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19518131/First%20Clash-%20First%20Mission_111013GIBSON-SERVE0731.aar

I suspect subsequent ones wont be as freely available as both sides try to conceal the forces used and any losses sustained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll dig it out and post here in a few minutes - but as you may have gathered from above it doesn't go for long. :)

There you are:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19518131/First%20Clash-%20First%20Mission_111013GIBSON-SERVE0731.aar

I suspect subsequent ones wont be as freely available as both sides try to conceal the forces used and any losses sustained.

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On our side we were in pursuit of said Americans with the expectation of being able to plant ourselves in defensive positions near our objectives. We did not expect you guys to be far up the road network. :o. That was a surprise. I do not know what the technicals stood in for but many on our side commented on the poor camo of those vehicles. Bright red. :)

Great turnout. Looking forward to next installment. Nice job 12Alfa! :luxhello:

Please consider the following to be overprinted with IMHO in large letters.

There is an overall feeling on Red that we had far less firepower than that described in the book. That said, having encountered the Canadian defensive line we accepted that we were never going to be able to press on. What we did know (through careful study of the eny's command personalities) is that in this scenario the Blue side was never going to be satisfied with just stopping Red in its tracks - but was going to come out of its defensive posture and mount a full-on counterattack. This is where the lack of firepower really hurt us. The opinion of players far more experience than me is that had the mission not been curtailed, Blue would have rolled us all the way back to the Eastern edge of the map and destroyed our artillery. As i/c AGTM assets, I feel we could have done a bit better than that, but I bow to greater experience and knowledge.

It seems to me that 12Alfa's conundrum was that he wanted to give us playable vehicles, so the BTR80 was the only realistic option. In real life, the BMP is a lot more potent, but in SB it isn't playable, and the vehicle's AI is notoriously impotent - frequently engaging targets at unrealistic ranges and then refusing to engage the same targets at closer ranges. This deficiency is a major issue with the members of Marko's Soviet V.U who are considering a national campaign to raise funds for a playable BMP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well just a pity you didn't actually ask someone on the Blue side.

If you had (ask anybody) they would have told you we were mounting at "best" a defence and at "worst" a delay. Lots of conversations about "falling back" to the Autobahn.

Indeed CO Blue stressed a couple of times, not going after Red because apparently that had been agreed beforehand between the two COs.

But don't let facts get in the way of a good bleat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe both sides overestimated each other :D

but I think once our BTR's started running into leopards the writing was on the wall.

Maybe some overall guidance on how we call a mission is in order especially as force preservation might be important.

This campaign has great potential and I for one am looking forward to it continuing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...